(PC) Johnson v. Superior Court of Sacramento

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DARRYL JOHNSON, No. 2:20-CV-1362-JAM-DMC-P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 SUPERIOR COURT OF SACRAMENTO, 15 Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 18 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On August 3, 2020, the Court directed Plaintiff to resolve the fee status for 19 this case within 30 days. Plaintiff was warned that failure to resolve the fee status may result in 20 dismissal of this action for lack of prosecution and failure to comply with court rules and orders. 21 See Local Rule 110. To date, Plaintiff has not complied. 22 The Court must weigh five factors before imposing the harsh sanction of dismissal. 23 See Bautista v. Los Angeles County, 216 F.3d 837, 841 (9th Cir. 2000); Malone v. U.S. Postal 24 Service, 833 F.2d 128, 130 (9th Cir. 1987). Those factors are: (1) the public's interest in 25 expeditious resolution of litigation; (2) the court's need to…